They were performing "just fine" before the Blitzers got A access on normals tho right? Let's change them back!

I'd have no issue with that. With Brets it's Cyanide who need to be convinced: they are "their" race, unlike the others (barring Khorne). Cyanide wanted a change to them at that time, which is why we got the A access on Blitzers. Cyanide don't appear to want a change now, so a case would need to be made to them that it is needed. There isn't a data-based case, though.

Obviously if the data shows this breaks them then it could be reversed.

Heh, so... you don't care if the data says the roster doesn't need to be improved, but would care if it said the change you desired made them too successful? Can I make some random roster changes too? We can change 'em all and let God sort 'em out! Arrrrrr!

They were performing "just fine" before the Blitzers got A access on normals tho right? Let's change them back!

Sadly, Cyanide takes the same backward approach gavrad suggests - they make arbitrary changes without consulting the data first and only later listen to it when it says they were baseless changes. Look at how that increase in Orc pricing worked out... that certainly wasn't based on any data, it was based on tard-o plasmoid declaring Orc's needed nerfing.

Bretts would be fine rolled back to their original design. Still a boring team either way.. give them all claw too! Still boring, probably still in the t1 range.

Friendly Reminder: Correlation does not equal Causation - tattoo it on the inside of your eyelids if it'll help.

I've been behind this change for a long time. I still think taking away wrestle from the blockers in exchange in exchange for a point of AV is a trade that makes them slightly worse at low TV, and slightly better at higher TV, which is perfect. Taking away catch from knights in exchange for the extra point of AV, plus bumping them to 120,000, accomplishs the same thing.
I know my third change is unpopular (peasants trading fend for wrestle), but I'd at least love to test it. Here's to hoping we get a more robust team editor than they've let on...

I've been behind this change for a long time. I still think taking away wrestle from the blockers in exchange in exchange for a point of AV is a trade that makes them slightly worse at low TV, and slightly better at higher TV, which is perfect. Taking away catch from knights in exchange for the extra point of AV, plus bumping them to 120,000, accomplishs the same thing.
I know my third change is unpopular (peasants trading fend for wrestle), but I'd at least love to test it. Here's to hoping we get a more robust team editor than they've let on...

Taking catch off all the blitzers would be a huge nerf.

Others have said the same. I'd still rather have the AV for long-term development of expensive pieces. Anyway, my goal is not really to buff Brets, just to make them make more sense. The argument still exists: the armor they're wearing just doesn't look like 8av. Whether the team in this game is what Plasmoid imagined or not is irrelevant. As Dode says, they're Cyanide's team, and this is how they look (which I personally love, and I don't think I'm alone in this). GW thought it made sense to give gutter runners a new ability to reflect the miniatures, it makes at least as much sense to alter Brets to reflect their in-game models.

The argument still exists: the armor they're wearing just doesn't look like 8av.

I bet NAMBLA has a whole bunch of arguments that technically exist... they're just really dumb arguments. Like the one you're making.

Maybe next time I play monopoly I'll say that my scotty dog piece looks like it could run faster than my wife's top hat piece, so I should get to move two extra spaces each turn. It's an argument that exists, after all... she...must...listen.... IT EXISTS!

Friendly Reminder: Correlation does not equal Causation - tattoo it on the inside of your eyelids if it'll help.

The argument still exists: the armor they're wearing just doesn't look like 8av.

I think it's been said before, but AV is not solely about armour. It's a simplified amalgamation of stats like toughness, armour etc which one might see in WFB. Yes, the armour looks heavy, but how tough are the people inside it?

And if it really bothers you then removing some of it would be a better solution. Gameplay > fluff.

The argument still exists: the armor they're wearing just doesn't look like 8av.

I think it's been said before, but AV is not solely about armour. It's a simplified amalgamation of stats like toughness, armour etc which one might see in WFB. Yes, the armour looks heavy, but how tough are the people inside it?

And if it really bothers you then removing some of it would be a better solution. Gameplay > fluff.

I bet NAMBLA has a whole bunch of arguments that technically exist... they're just really dumb arguments. Like the one you're making.

Maybe next time I play monopoly I'll say that my scotty dog piece looks like it could run faster than my wife's top hat piece, so I should get to move two extra spaces each turn. It's an argument that exists, after all... she...must...listen.... IT EXISTS!

If the changes are bad, make your case. What you're saying, and really what you always say, is: "your argument is bad because it is". I can't speak for anyone else, but yes, I've noticed you're both full of shit.